That doesn’t make sense when you stack it against the cost of other efforts Google takes with the pixel phones surrounding security. MTE is arguably more important than even the titan chip, and a whole security enclave isn’t exactly cheap either.
Well, at least they’re not being entirely stupid, just mostly.
It is not. I can setup a automated reply if you continue to insist on… Whatever this is, or we can agree to disagree which is fine, but I find your perspective twisted, ignorant, and incorrect. I’m not sure what you want from me beyond that other than to capitulate to your tantrum.
That’s not accurate.
Nah, you’re wrong. Code is almost exclusively implementations with a final optimized form for a task akin to a recipe.
I disagree wholeheartedly.
It’s just not man. Maybe bad code has a style, but good code can always be be broken down to optimized implementations if done properly, and even if, you could then say the same thing about a sufficiently developed recipe, or meal, as you can generally tell the chef that made it or diner it came from in town, etc, etc in a lot of cases. I’m not saying it can’t be used to make something artistic at some level, but code itself is not deserving of copyright, and copyright itself is entirely busted anyway. The concept is unfit and untooled for modern society.
That’s just not true. There are optimal implementations in code and computer science. It’s not expressive art at the code level.
Coding isn’t creative though. There’s an optimum solution to every problem, the layer above the code may be some form of art that needs protected but the code itself is just a recipe.
I disagree. I would say both are incomplete comparisons because code is special, it has limitations, it relies on underlying hardware support, and it’s implementing, generally, functionality not anything creative. I don’t have to present a good solution though in order to point out something is broken, I leave that for those more intelligent than I, but copyright is objectively a poor answer to code and is not comparable to an expressive artistic written work.
They’re moving to this as it’s the only defense against oppression, but copy left was intentionally designed to combat copyright because the core founders of open source disagreed with it and the oppression it was causing in the software development community. Imagine if a recipe for Chilli dogs was copyrightable, but not the concept of Chilli dogs. That’s downright silly.
I disagree entirely. I grew up when the conversation around if code should even be copyrightable was happening, and at the time to an extent it made some sense, but the entire copy left movement was intended to combat the copyright of code in the name of open source because copy righting code is both stupid and baseless. Imagine if for loops were copyrighted? That’s what you’re essentially arguing unless there’s some sort of vague subjective measure you’re using to determine when something is copyrightable. The entire thing is just oppressive and does not help the people involved that actually deserve benefit and protection. I’m not saying to cut lose and allow rampant theft but copyright as currently designed and implemented is objectively broken and untooled to the tasks of today, stifling innovation and protecting corporate interests above creators and actual developers.
Code should’ve never been copyrightable from the start. It’s basically the compute equivalent of a recipe. That aside, almost all modern transformer models are trained on generated data by this point, how would we even apply traditional copyright to that? Whole thing needs tossed and retooled. Entire economic system with it tbh, just slows innovation, and despite what you might believe it doesn’t protect the little guy, it just allows massive corporate conglomerates to buy up everything and control for what will be pretty much the extent of your lifetime.
I don’t know if a lack of direct support is exactly the same as trying to force everyone, as they could’ve easily prevented her from reverse engineering this project, but that’s sort of splitting hairs and they definitely know they have an open source community who would appreciate even a modicum of support that they’re ignoring.
Cyberpunk is infinitely better than it released and such a good game. I bought it on launch and ended up just waiting for the dlc to drop before my first playthrough, they had such a good game underneath so I get all the hype but the bean counters just under estimated the necessary timeline for it to be ready. 😤
You just conceded my entire point. Ethical AI exists, it can be regulated, and the problem is how a tool is built and used, not the mere existence of the tool. The rest is meaningless boogeymaning. Your “99.99%” figure came directly out of your ass, and abundant supply does not make something worthless. Additionally, nobody said Ghibli knockoffs cure cancer. You picked the dumbest use case you could find and are pretending it defines the whole technology. You also turned “your computer is built on exploitation too” into “well, my exploitation is probably smaller and somebody may have been paid,” which is not remotely moral. I think it’s extremely smart to do some of what you mentioned though: regulate training, require transparency, license protected work. Great. None of that supports “do not use AI" or invalidates it as a tool. Oh and ending a comment full of invented statistics, cherry-picked examples, and arguments nobody made by accusing everyone else of bad faith is honestly… 🤌
Slop is a consequence of tool use, not a design feature of the tool. There are vast amounts of ethical data to train against. Etc, etc, etc. I could go on but you don’t really care, you care selectively. Or you wouldn’t be using the computer (the tool in front of your hands) undeniably built upon exploitation and compromise. It is a tool. It exists. You can’t stuff the genie back in the box. Work to make shit better instead of needlessly complaining about shit you can’t control like it’s some sort of generalized target you can paint on every iteration.
Nah brother I’m not even going to continue giving you my time. You called my science and field a hobby, you questioned my reasoning when it was already presented, and you did not approach in good faith, you approached with preconceived notions, prejudice, and shit opinions based on your bad configs. I don’t owe you shit.
Kimi k3 can be ran at a cost of $37,900 with Mac studios. It’s not a hobby. Cool, glad for you. Tools are tools, I bet you don’t own or like an absolute gob of them but it doesn’t change their usefulness, and you don’t need kimi k3 for everything, I mentioned it specifically because it’s comparable to generalized frontier ai models and can be ran locally, but I also stated that you’re better off tuning models for your workloads specifically. Jfc why even comment if you’re gonna be so dumb and selective with your reading?
110%